Fashion eyewear, NHS glasses, sunglasses and more

Posted on
Page
of 34
  • In my experience they are all much of a muchness so it's worth finding your local independent optician. (I go to Mr Lim in Crouch End, no frills but with a technician who makes a great job of fitting lenses into the vintage frames which I take in).

  • Go to Cubitts.
    Although SpecSavers has the best and most advanced machinery.

  • My reading glasses lenses from Specsavers Angel were no good, they needed returning.

  • I had my last eye test at Cubitts in KC, was a good experience for me.

    Previously have used Tesco Opticians, Boots Opticians and others, they are all much for a much,

    Boots were the first to ask me if I wore an eye patch as a child

  • Eye tests are all the same. Just got to where ever actually suits you and then take your prescription and buy where you see something you like.

  • I don't have a prescription, I just don't think my eyesight is 100% so want to see if I've killed my eyeballs during lockdown.

  • Like you can’t read anymore, that’s from getting old.

  • Yeah, I reckon I'm losing my longer distance focusing because I stare at computers 18hrs a day.

  • Happens, you'll need a tiny one to fix your issues. Mines is a pure stinker and I have a cracking stigmatism too.

  • always cubitts for me

  • I use Niche in Glasgow, they are pretty pricey but the stuff is all top quality.

    They have an online store too now! https://www.nichebazaarstudio.com

  • This is not right. They’re not all the same at all.

  • It’s your age. The cornea hardens as you get older and your vision starts to impair. In and around 40 is the most common age for this to happen.

  • My distance vision went to shit when I had a glaucoma test from some old school optometrist who pressed a popsicle stick against my lenses as part of the process. My eyes were tearing for months afterwards, so no, they're not all the same.

  • Isn't that when stuff close up is harder to see? Mine seems to be the opposite - road signs being blurrier than I remember them being and taking longer to focus.

  • Most practices have the same tech now, all the high st options are up to date and even the small branches have invested heavily in some fancy new stuff up here. I’m sticking by my statement

  • Aplanation tonometry shouldn't result in any form for visual impairment. It remains the gold standard in the industry. Non-contact tonometry (puff of air test) is convenient but not as reliable. You had a better test, (possibly conducted by a poorer practitioner, although this is the Internet so...)

    Edit. Or fluorescein minim? Either way.

  • The tech may be the same but the individual doing it plays a huge part in the confidence you feel in the result (and can influence the result itself, either in how they listen to your answers or in how they choose to interpret the numbers before filling out the prescription).

    I had two eye tests on successive days a month or so ago, one at my local Specsavers (chosen because the fancy OCT scan was only an extra tenner) and one at Ace & Tate in Covent Garden (chosen because they were free). Having had the same distance prescription for 20ish years I knew damn well I was getting age-related presbyopia (arms too short to read unless I took my glasses off) and was expecting to have a discussion about varifocals.

    In Specsavers, I felt I was being passed from one person to another with no explanation of who anyone was (one person did the OCT scan and a couple of other tests, then another did the 'is it better with one ... or with two ...' that I think of as a traditional eye test), then after sitting for a while waiting for the second person to come back to me to discuss the prescription, a third came up to me with 'so, we're going to look at varifocals.' Er, no, I haven't yet talked through what I want, or my needs, or the disadvantages of varifocals against separate reading and distance specs, or indeed whether I should just keep on taking my glasses off to read.

    The following day in Ace and Tate most of the kit looked identical (no OCT gear though), but it was one person who took me through all of the tests (resulting in a slightly different prescription to the day before), and had time to discuss options at the end. He then passed me over to a colleague to look at frames (not that I liked any of them), but that was at least an explicit handover, and while I still wasn't sure what I wanted to end up with I had a much clearer idea of what to think about.

    I'm sure either prescription will result in acceptable vision correction, but I'm left with far more confidence in one practice than in the other.

  • Interesting, thanks! Definitely started the moment I had the test, so I guess it was the practitioner… to think I’ve been telling the wrong story (or the right story from the wrong angle) all these years.

  • Poor technique could result in corneal abrasion that would account for watering, but should heal in 24-48hrs, without lasting vision loss.

  • Definitely lasted, it's been ten or so years now.

  • That could be all the beers.

  • I’ve been well impressed with the service I had from Ace & Tate recently. Nice range of glasses which are all £100 with prescription lenses.

    They seem to be run fairly ethically as well.

    @jsabine I did have an OCT scan but I’m not sure if it’s available in all branches. It helps that Ace & Tate’s head optician does the eye tests in the Manchester store where I went.

  • It’s your age.

    This sucks.

    I spent a fortune on fancy pants occupational lenses (and new frames) back in May last year, and I'm already having to go back to get a new prescription, as my vision has deteriorated noticeably in that time.

    On the upside, age related deterioration is apparently not a linear thing, and happens in fits and starts.

  • Post a reply
    • Bold
    • Italics
    • Link
    • Image
    • List
    • Quote
    • code
    • Preview
About

Fashion eyewear, NHS glasses, sunglasses and more

Posted by Avatar for EEI @EEI

Actions